Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Kroothawk wrote:Tomb Kings really neutral?

Yes, read their fluff. Tomb Kings are very much, "I'm trying to sleep, stop breaking into my tomb and stealing my stuff." Settra aside, Tomb Kings have no designs on world domination. They are really just waiting for the liche priests to figure out how to give them everlasting life without the crusty skin condition.

Anyway, as for Grimstones latest updates...

This really does look like a reboot with everything changing apart from the basic to hit and to wound tables. I guess with ASF cancelling out ASL, Swordmasters aren't that rubbish, but I can't think of any reason you would field Greatswords. With only 6 attacks (with champion) striking last, they are never going to be able to hit anything. Or does "Stepping Up" come into play here? Gah, so confused!

If these rumours are true, the magic phase is now madness (in a good way... sort of... I guess). I don't really get the bonuses for successfully casting a spell. Ok, I get the Lore of Fire one, but the rest don't really make sense.

Well fighting in two ranks is different than removing models from the back.. So I imagine great weapons can STILL attack as long as their entire unit wasnt killed but they dont get extra ranks..

imo it makes greatswords better since they're pretty horrible right now except on the charge.. Atleast they'll be able to actually make attacks now!

True Line of sight
Units draw true line of sight. You are considered in cover when shot at through another unit, granting a -1 or -2 penalty on to hit rolls. Note that someone else has said this is more likely as well.


Mother of god, GW....

Oh, and I noticed that we roll 2d6 for charge distance now for 1-6 M value, I like that ^.^

Karon wrote:Oh, and I noticed that we roll 2d6 for charge distance now for 1-6 M value, I like that ^.^

do we know if that id added to regular movement or instead of.
personally i dont care for it. it seems that it will make charging completely unreliable if the only distance you can count on is your base move.

@Flashman
As it stands on the rumours, greatswords can fight in 1 rank with great weapons, but as casualties are taken from the back they will always fight with a complete front rank, until the unit is too small.

I don't know if the 2nd rank models will be able to attack with a hand weapon in addition to this. My guess is yes.

Even the 'to wound' table has changed (supposedly), with all the N's being 6.

Allies I don't quite mind - it's allowing stuff like Empire to use Kislev again, Beastmen & Warrior of Chaos joint operations, and so on. The implications of a few rules do bother me (Dangerous Terrain), but overall I can't complain about it provided people are responsible and not cheesy gits (Ex: High Elves with Stone Thrower spamming).

Can't complain about more duplicate forces in higher point levels - oh no, my enemy can try to fit in six units of Chaos Chosen in a 3K point game! Emperor help me if they have to field six of the units with an average of none of them above 250pts in the 50% rumor, and 125pts in the 25% rumor!

Old movement complaints have been given.

Charge of 2D6 is slightly better, but now I fear for stuff like Skaven Night Runners charging 18" or a unit of Chaos Warriors 16". You're giving Infantry the (chance of) movement like cavalry. You're reducing the risk of a unit 7" away from your M4 unit being a failed charge, but increasing the odds of a charge that by modern rules would be a turn's march then a max-range charge away.

Flier movement to 10 I guess is to implement the LotR style "Halved movement when close to enemies" schtick. I have a few complaints, but before I voice them I have two things to ask:
1) Ground or fly movement used for charge?
2) Infantry 2D6 or Cavalry 3D6 pick 2 best?

Reforming is a bit harsher it appears, but also arguably less so. Without a musician, it's harsher as you could do something like modify frontage / ranks by up to 5 while only halving your movement - without musician here going from 5x6 to 6x5 looks like it'd cost you everything. However, in contrast, with a musician it looks like no move penalty - whereas a 5x6 to 6x5 would be half movement gone this edition, next it could be none lost.

Still think Skirmishers on a base is a crappy idea.

Power / Dispel Dice looks like crap, but then I play an army that can generate a lot of Dispel Dice on its own (+4 with one character). It looks like it'll lower the degree of separation between power dice and dispel dice (especially the "no more than 12 PD" schtick). The closeness of such and bonuses from levels mean I predict a dramatic rise in usage of bonus-to-casting and bonus-to-dispel equipment, since the disparity will have to be reached via bonuses instead of dice now.

Loss of miscast is a shame for me, but then I lament the loss of Assault Cannon jamming so it may just be me.

Bound spells just look odd now. For instance: What the hell happens with Tomb Kings now? Wait... what does happen to Tomb Kings now? Are we going to see casting values to their incantations next edition? Worse, does this mean Tomb Kings can miscast / irresistible now?

I wonder - and sorta hope - that Scaly Skin is ignored for stuff like Lore of Metal. I know it gives a bit of an edge, but fluff-wise it does make sense: Are you really going to turn a lizardman's skin into a searing substance? How much iron do they have in their diet?

True line of sight is going to play hell with several things, for instance Scouts are really going to be changed next edition ($2 says it's like WH40K infiltrate, another $2 Ambush from WotR, last $2 says it's like Outflank from 40K). If it's none of these, it would surprise me. Scount has to be changed, as right now the only thing it lets you do is put them in your deployment zone last (One of the requirements of Scout being that no enemy can see you, and "true line of sight" will make that a bitch).

+3 to Ranks, alone, insures that my Goblins stay worthless into next edition

Well, Wyverns are even more worthless next to Dragons now. Whereas a Dragon is something like 6+2D6 attacks in combat, a Wyvern is... 3! Hydras are going to become pure evil now, hatred and their breath attack in HtH.

Joy, Special Rules is becoming 40K's universal rules.

Glad to see ASF doesn't over-rule everything any more. Some people will complain, I'm glad to see that a guy charging through obstacles against a dude with pikes while using a Great Weapon is no longer going first.

Frenzy has been toned down, it appears. Bets on if this means it's impossible to lose Frenzy now?

Stone Trolls are worthless against anything but Lore of Fire now. Oh look, I can take a 5+ ward... or just keep my 4+ Regen. Glad to see WHFB is going to 40K route of "Something a problem? Give more cover / invuln saves."

Several types of regeneration has potential, but we'll have to wait and see who gets the most cheese for the rule.

No change to armor save modifiers is good for me (I mostly play light infantry armies), but bad for other players (Chaos Warriors and Dwarves could really enjoy that ruling). It's going to make the rumored guess weapon stuff even cheesier, however (21 Auto-Hits at S4 with no save!).

Minsc wrote:Allies I don't quite mind - it's allowing stuff like Empire to use Kislev again, Beastmen & Warrior of Chaos joint operations, and so on. The implications of a few rules do bother me (Dangerous Terrain), but overall I can't complain about it provided people are responsible and not cheesy gits (Ex: High Elves with Stone Thrower spamming).

You might want to re-read what he posted.

[*]The allies rules are intended to be used by more than 1 person. You are not supposed to use more than one armybook in your army.

Meaning it's limiting who can play with who in multiplayer games. There is still nothing allowing a HE player(using your example) to buy Stone Thrower units from another book in a regular 1 on 1 game.

here ya go minsc...

That actually sums up GW rules very well. Very appealing, a bit over priced, with a faint odour about them and more holes than you can count.

Mhm.

I, actually, ADORE the ally rules.

I hate a lot of these rules, no, I LOATHE a lot of these rules, but I love a lot of the others.

We can't know until we have it in front of our faces, and our eyes reading.

And personally, I think this is going to be worth buying the hardcover rulebook for. This edition is probably going to be the most massive set of changes any genre of warhammer has seen.

fantasy has needed real line of sight for awhile now.. There is no reason a unit of skinks should block LOS to a unit of cold one riders considering one is twice as tall.. Negative modifiers to hit makes more sense

It wont be anything like 40k true line of sight because the shooting elements in WFB are no where near as mobile as 40k to line up specific shots

Karon wrote:
And personally, I think this is going to be worth buying the hardcover rulebook for. This edition is probably going to be the most massive set of changes any genre of warhammer has seen.

Here's hoping for Siege and Skirmish rules in the hardcover, as well. I wish they'd tell us a price and what's in what edition already!

usernamesareannoying wrote:here ya go minsc...

Aw, thanks. Now I'll have something to feed to my Clan Eshin Nightrunners.

nom nom nom...

I just hope GW knows what they are doing here. This could either go really, really bad, because of one or two rules, or really really good.

Heh, so many changes. which means i need to look at my armies AGAIN and see wtf is going to be needed for them.

I think it would be unlikely for them to change the to hit and to wound tables.

They are the only thing that makes warhammer, warhammer (also 40k, which is why it is warhammer 40k)

Over the years everything else has changed in the engine, except for player based turns.


ALSO:
I'm hoping that for charging the mvt is roll the number of d6 and pick the highest, so cav are more likely to consistently roll hig, whereas infantry will be slower.
A unit of seekers charging up to 28 inches is ridiculous, but say 10 (regular mvt) + (dice rolls of 2, 4, 6) to give 16 is much more sensible.
Then add the bonuses mentioned in OP.

This is what they do in WOTR and although I like the surity of the current movement the WOTR method is a much more sensible option than the completely random one rumoured.

Will also be interesting to see what characters like Kroak who generate pool dice do with their dice.

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:I think it would be unlikely for them to change the to hit and to wound tables.

They are the only thing that makes warhammer, warhammer (also 40k, which is why it is warhammer 40k)

Over the years everything else has changed in the engine, except for player based turns.


ALSO:
I'm hoping that for charging the mvt is roll the number of d6 and pick the highest, so cav are more likely to consistently roll hig, whereas infantry will be slower.
A unit of seekers charging up to 28 inches is ridiculous, but say 10 (regular mvt) + (dice rolls of 2, 4, 6) to give 16 is much more sensible.
Then add the bonuses mentioned in OP.

This is what they do in WOTR and although I like the surity of the current movement the WOTR method is a much more sensible option than the completely random one rumoured.

Will also be interesting to see what characters like Kroak who generate pool dice do with their dice.

Agreed, makes much more sense

I skipped several pages due to overload, so I may be repeating what someone else said. If so, I apologize profusely.
I play both WFB and 40k. Of the two, I prefer WFB because it makes you think and plan. And historical tactics work, so a history nut like myself finds satisfaction in applying them. Everything moves like fast cav? Ridiculous!
Have you ever tried to move a block of troops in a coherent fashion? It ain't easy. Movement is my favorite part of WFB and to dumb it down to almost 40k level may cause me to store the square bases and play exclusively round-base games. WFB is not 40k, but it seems the distinction is becoming more and more blurred. Does anyone else see this as a problem?

Yup. I've probably said it more than anyone else in this thread.

Its a shame, but again, these are ALL rumors, so we can't judge anything right now, no matter how confirmed they really are, they could very well be a bullshitter flakking with us for giggles.

Grimstonefire wrote:That actually sums up GW rules very well. Very appealing, a bit over priced, with a faint odour about them and more holes than you can count.

I actually laughed out loud.

My Dwarves are very excited by these rumours, a brief rundown of what sounds good from a dwarfy perspective

Stubborn for more ranks - my troops may be expensive but I can play a small number of units with good saves, stubborn, range of general (or general inside) and BSB nearby. Stick the slayers on one flank and try charging that!

Charge Ranges - I went from max charge 6" to max charge 9" and potentially 15" if it is really 2D6. Either way I might actually get to charge something for a change.

Bricks with flags score and objective based game. The army consists almost solely of bricks with flags. I can stick a thane with the stone on an objective and have a stubborn unit with high ld, good saves, poss re-rolls and poss stubborn and NO FLANKS! Hell i can stick my slayers on an objective and giggle.

New Magic Phase - cap of 12 PD and the potential to generate a Dispel dice for every dice they generate is good and closes the PD/Dispel dice gap. Presumably some kind of dwarfy bonus will apply to dispelling still and if my runesmiths still ad +1 I can potentially have more dispel dice than you have power dice.

And some magic armies might only have 2 ower dice to play with a turn. Ouch! Still adding level to the casting cost helps out a lot there.

War Machines no partial - self explanatorily good, time to bust out the grudge throwers.

2 Ranks for shooting, also good. As is TLOS.

Slowing down heavy cav, good, more turns to shoot them. And dwarves don't suffer from the slowness so we got considerably faster.

Skirmishers nerfed - terrible rule/idea, good for dwarves.

Slann look to be Nasty. Soul of Stone, Focused Rumination, Cupped hands of the old ones. Roll 1 power die, add a second for free, then add 4. Average of 11. If I miscast, I can transfer the result to my opponent. Or, I could just re-roll the result.

Kirasu wrote:fantasy has needed real line of sight for awhile now.. There is no reason a unit of skinks should block LOS to a unit of cold one riders considering one is twice as tall.. Negative modifiers to hit makes more sense

It wont be anything like 40k true line of sight because the shooting elements in WFB are no where near as mobile as 40k to line up specific shots

The abstraction of fantasy is / was one of its most attractive features for me. I like the freedom in being able to model whatever you want, because the game can essentially be played top-down all around base size and position, with terrain having clearly delineated functionality. There is zero confusion about what or where things are at, and actually the only way you can currently model to advantage is with the placement of monster heads, as breath weapons magically appear from their mouth not base (if you can't tell, I hate the hell out of this anomaly).

For the curious, I also liked area terrain in 40k and vomit with rage every time I hear arguments about modeling-to-advantage or try get my head around the discrepancy of hull / weapon mount LoS ...............

RE: The Other Changes > WTF is going on with fantasy?!

- Salvage

Boss_Salvage wrote:

Kirasu wrote:fantasy has needed real line of sight for awhile now.. There is no reason a unit of skinks should block LOS to a unit of cold one riders considering one is twice as tall.. Negative modifiers to hit makes more sense

It wont be anything like 40k true line of sight because the shooting elements in WFB are no where near as mobile as 40k to line up specific shots

The abstraction of fantasy is / was one of its most attractive features for me. I like the freedom in being able to model whatever you want, because the game can essentially be played top-down all around base size and position, with terrain having clearly delineated functionality. There is zero confusion about what or where things are at, and actually the only way you can currently model to advantage is with the placement of monster heads, as breath weapons magically appear from their mouth not base (if you can't tell, I hate the hell out of this anomaly).

For the curious, I also liked area terrain in 40k and vomit with rage every time I hear arguments about modeling-to-advantage or try get my head around the discrepancy of hull / weapon mount LoS ...............

RE: The Other Changes > WTF is going on with fantasy?!

- Salvage

My thoughts exactly.

But it's totally awesome that your Skaven Clanrat regiment can be seen from over the hill because you have Queek Headtaker in it. :( You're telling me it doesn't make sense to be able to light them up in such an instance?

I can see people trying to mail order via eBay and other sites the old metal giants now, if only because of the fact that they're going to be able to hide them behind terrain now. "Sorry, that small building means you can't see my Giant any more." Low-to-ground Hellpit Abomination conversions are going to become a big thing too.

If there is no armour mods anymore, salamanders just became useless vs the very models they are designed to kill, low T, great armour save models such as heavy cav and heavy infantry. Even with the increased numbers they will hit....

Supposedly the armor save modifiers are not changing as of the latest front-page update. They still remain.

Minsc wrote:But it's totally awesome that your Skaven Clanrat regiment can be seen from over the hill because you have Queek Headtaker in it. :( You're telling me it doesn't make sense to be able to light them up in such an instance?

I can see people trying to mail order via eBay and other sites the old metal giants now, if only because of the fact that they're going to be able to hide them behind terrain now. "Sorry, that small building means you can't see my Giant any more." Low-to-ground Hellpit Abomination conversions are going to become a big thing too.

Nonsense. It didn't happen in 40K, it wont happen in Warhammer.


Firstly, it's not a sword point or wing that counts, its the core of the model, which will hopefully be fully described in the rulebook as it is in the 40k rules.
Secondly, even if you can see a model in a unit, you'll still have to deal with the to hit modifiers. It's still much better to shoot at a big juicy target unit in the open than the head of one model in the distance.
Thirdly, in almost all instances, if you can see something, you yourself can be seen. In addition any to hit penalty you suffer when shooting at a target unit will in turn be suffered by the targeted enemy returning fire (barring good positioning and tactics). This makes it much harder to abuse, as shrinking you models means they can't see, and heightening them makes them much more difficult to hide.

I have absolutely no problem with the new Tlos rules. Charging is gonna be hard to swallow, but Tlos is nothing.

Yup, nothing wrong with Tlos. Especially since it seems the big nasties are getting plenty of buffs. I am interested to see what is considered the "core" of a model. Would a skink hide the core of a saurus? Or is the Saurus fair game? I'd imagine they would be fair game, which is fine. I just hope they do well in covering their bases, something that hasn't always been GW's strong point. Guess we'll need to make our forests taller. Hills blocking line of sight really isnt that important anymore, as they won't be as prevalent/necessary now. These current rules seem to make hills obsolete more or less, which is, once again, fine by me.